Siska
Members-
Posts
75 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by Siska
-
Take2 would want at least to cover their investment to date. That said, it means that they would propably a few millions to sell the IP, than you have to account for additional investement from new owner to finish the game. With game that has so many negative reviews on steam, and is played currently by 149 people on average, no one will invest that kind of money. There is simply no ROI on this IP. So i doubt someone will buy it. Maybe after a long time, when KSP2 brand is worth nothing more, in 5 years or so, the price of the IP would be reasonable enough for someone to pick it up. But at that point, who will play KSP? I don't see it comming. PD just demolished the game.
-
Does anyone else feel as if they saw this coming?
Siska replied to Kernel Kraken's topic in KSP2 Discussion
Yes, after EA release i totally saw it comming. Maybe i ranted angry on forum too much. I still hoped and waited for patches, but 6 months after release, game had game breaking bugs. At that point i was disappointed and made here that we should all make refund requests. I was dismissed as being negative hahah Somehow, some people are blaiming the community for game failure, because we were not supporting it enough. -
I had only laptop at the time, since i have to travel a lot because of work. On laptop GPU rtx 2070 it was running ok only if i had not more than two engines sucking the same fuel tank. A bit later i got thinkpad p15 with A3000 grašphic card, which is about the same as rtx 2070 laptop gpu. It was running a bit worse actualy. So i didn't played it for some time, until few patches were out. I bought now desktop computer with RTX 4090, 64GB ram, I9 14900K. On that machine it runs good i must say. But i didn't upgraded it just for KSP 2 no. It is really bad that you need a rig like this just for this game since KSP1 runs smoothly with all the mods.
-
All debates are less and less relevant
-
No, i was very excited about it, that's why I bought EA the first day. After half a year after EA, it was obvious that something is not well with the development of the game. I think most of the people realised it at about the same time. That is when it all begin to go downards regarding opinions. Heck, game was not playable at all for the first 6 months.
-
Well, it smelled bad from the beginning. Saying it out loud, meant you are a negative person, but here it is out loud now
-
Propably community will slowly die out, nobody will play KSP 2, and no one will make the sequel. So long franchise.
-
Simply, making basic parts that you need. Interstellar travel, and basic colony parts. It would be enough 1 engine for intesrstellar, maybe few engines for start. Few parts. Very basic game, and than adding parts and features on top of that. Through time, you approach on the level of parts numbers and features of KSP1. that would be the way to go, and it would deserve a word "sequel". That way, you would have interstellar travleing, colonies, and i think people would dig it. If it would worked better than KSP2 at release though.
-
Couldn't ESA buy KSP2 and continue funding and developing it?
Siska replied to Dinlink's topic in KSP2 Discussion
Why should anyone buy a title on which was spent millions already, has 404.7 avg players, and overwhelmingly negative reviews on steam. From my POV it is not a good investment unfortunatelly. PD and IG blew it all. -
really? i didn't know that. if you can do that, than KSP1 is far stronger than 2. I modded KSP1 to the point that it looks really amazing. As i said before, they should patch KSP1 to the point so you don't have to mod it, and it could be a sequel. I am sad for interstellar travel, but hey, you can also add that with mods (didn't try it though). Also... https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/ct7gca/noo_not_uber_entertainment/
-
What was really the only improvement, was the wings. That was something worth of a sequel. All else except loading times, you can get with mods on KSP1. Also, all mentioned doesen't make life better playing the game, it is just cosmetics. As for UI, this is more personal preference than actual improvement.
-
True that. But what is it good for if you cannot play the game. You can get that sound effects in stock libraries online, at least for start. My impression was, that they focused a lot on cosmetics, while core of the game was not a priority or was underestimated. Sound effects and music didn't make KSP1 great. Playability did though. It is totaly valid to pursue that, but not when the game itself is lacking almost everything.
-
The problem is, that they killed the franchise. There is never going to be a sequel to KSP1. Nobody will touch the title ever again. So we're stuck with KSP1 until we die As for Nate, it was bad management. They got the money, they wanted to do it but at the end they didn't make it to the 1.0 version while they spent all the budget. For instance, to pay people, to go and record real rocket launch sounds is throwing money away. That doesn't make the game good. You can Implement that later. First of all, you have to make money structure and decide what are priorities on the project. Cosmetics is the last. So we all had very good music and sound samples at EA launch, but no game whatsoever.
- 237 replies
-
- 10
-
As far as i know, all games with Nate involved were promised updates and patches but instead were abandoned at the end, not finished and removed from steam.
-
robotics are amazing
-
My Patience has run out, now I am just disgusted.
Siska replied to RayneCloud's topic in KSP2 Discussion
Exactly. For instance, 2019-2022 period was "Covid sickness" period but not because just of Covid, but also employed people sickness. IT industry was booming at the time, and we had few instances where programmers came to us and wanted more money "or I'll leave" kind of attitude. Of course, we raised wages (you must count that in Europe if you want to give someone 4.500 EUR net salary, that costs you around 7.500 because of mandatory health, social insurance etc..., it goes progressive) and I know that probably is not a lot for USA. Now, the situation is that you have: Expensive developer (more than you get on market) and no one is interested in lesser monthly salary No one wants to come work back at office when we requested to Also less experienced programmers that have wages well beyond their capabilities So as employer you are confronted with two options. Renew the team, cut costs and have reserve money for bonuses and future pay rises, or on other hand, people that blackmailed you when there were "golden times" after working for you for years. We invented a scheme, where we rent programmers for other companies to outsource workforce, so that covers few heads so we didn't have to fire (not that it is profitable, but you kind of keep the people), and hired senior programmers that cost 30% less for same amount of work. You see, KSP 2 was in "the works" during the Covid pandemic, and it probably costed a lot of money. As I see, they had people on payroll that were working on "game launcher" which is bizarre for my opinion. No man's sky was a team of 15 developers, they managed to pull out the games from black hole in 15 months with upgrades and patches. That is what optimized team is. Also, everybody complaints about companies making profit. My dear, we live in a profit based economy and no one will do anything of there is not profit involved. Do you think you would have food on your table if farming was not profitable? probable not. Totally agree, as I said, I do not blame the devs but poor management. So if you want to be mad at someone, be mad at poor management of KSP 2 not really making it profitable. -
My Patience has run out, now I am just disgusted.
Siska replied to RayneCloud's topic in KSP2 Discussion
I am project manager with 15 developers and 6 designers in my team working in field for 15 years (not gaming). My experience is that you never layoff workers that do a good job. If cuts come, you layoff the ones that contributed the least. Maybe whole studio did not contribute much as such. I am compassionate with people that loss their job. Heck we even employ people as long as it had to for them to find another job. So much for not giving a damn. I plainly said that these things happen and people have to adapt. Did anyone cried for all the programmers that google laid off on last year and a half? As much as i see on forum people were blaiming devs for everything while i mantained distance from that and blaimed bad management. As for AI, people that know basic programming will be impacted as for true developers and engineers i don't think there is any worry. And as from my experience, not a single programmer that knows how to do it's job wasn't without one for more than a month. -
This aged well
-
My Patience has run out, now I am just disgusted.
Siska replied to RayneCloud's topic in KSP2 Discussion
Well, you really have to be a bad developer to end up homeless. I never heard of such occasions. I mean, yes, it is a bit harder now but i think a dev always finds a job, at the end maybe switches technology and enviroment of programming. But homeless, no. Destroyed lives? I don't know but layoffs happens all the time. And new emplyments also. Yes i am compassionate about layoffs, but they have 2 months grace period and i am pretty sure everbody will be ok. It's not like they are in coal mining industry or something it's on the verge of existence. -
but it was done before with KSP1 so.... I think here, the problem was: Underestimating the game Overestimating your capabilities as a PM Not delivering in time because of the latter two Mismanegement Literally the bigger the dev team is, less good games they create overall. Similar to Bethesda's Starfield, the team there was over 500 people, while on Fallout 4 over 200, Skyrim a bit over 100. Also with bigger games, finnacial risk is way higher. And as for KSP2, i said a long time ago it is done, because no one want's to buy it because of overhyped and underwhelming launch of EA. So financial calculation is logical for a game studio. Why to invest even more money and sallaries if: No one will buy your game Player base is 10% of KSP1 Bad reviews on Steam They did it to themselves.
-
So you say gamers shoud take the responsibility? I think management team (propably nate) should take it. Based on your opinion players are responsible for not cheering enough to motivate the team. There is rarely an EA release with this kind of reputation. I think that it's a part of project management to think and deliver it the best way possible. So if you buy an badly built Tesla car, you should motivate Elon Musk, cheer him so next time you buy it it may be better. That is not the way it goes. We live in a capitalism, where open critic expells bad products from the market, and another better product is more sucessfull because it is plainly better. At least that's the basic of capitalism. Your opinion is more soviet style, where you could buy 1 of 3 available cars, and be happy about it.
-
Cyberpunk 2077 was canceled and refunded on ps4. And Sony doesen't really do refunds as such. You could play it. It was playable as much as ksp2 is. The only thing is that if everybody would want refunds, maybe publishers would take more caution in the future what they release for 50$. But if everybody just accepts it, it will happen again in the future. Putting the game on sale after a month.
-
Well it think it was my emotional outburst, being frustrated for waiting and be excited for something that i think will never reach the end of development. It is not at all because of 50$, but bare principles. Why, i kind of expected the game to be playable in six months. Playable means game without "gamebreaking" bugs that makes it unplayable. I would understand that you cannot expect that ships of 150+ parts works without bugs, but honestly, a one off launch in first try without being frustrated defines "playable.